Have computer games ruined table RPGs?
jgsugden
Legend
Video games have been around for a long time. I remember playing Pool of Radiance back in the late 80s. It didn't change how I role played. It wasn't until the internet became a regular part of my life that I began to see my approach to the game change.
Back in the days of 1E and early 2E, people had only the books and Dragon magazine (White Dwarf, Dungeon, etc ...) to use as aides in designing a game and running a character. The limits of their tactics were bound by their mind and the things in those books. If you wanted to figure out how to optimize an attack strategy, you had to do all the work yourself.
Now, we have the internet. Somebody comes up with an issue and starts discussing it on a message board. Then, someone else takes the work of the first person, analyses it and adds their own $0.02. Then another person adds their perspective and analysis. Soon, you have a 200 post long thread discussing the optimized use of power attack that has been read by thousands of players. Those players take that knowledge back to their games and spread it amongst all their friends. One of them returns to the internet to discuss the use of power attack in a particular scenario and the cycle begins again, but in a narrower area of the general rule.
This has resulted in an optimization of tactics in the game by players and DMs. In the old days, many players did not consider the benefits of interacting their abilities with the abilities of other PCs. Now, these discussions flood message boards on a daily basis.
As people have begun to discuss the optimization of the game, they tend to pull back from the game and see it as a collection of rules instead of as a game as a whole.
Think back to the earliest board games you ever played. Candyland. Chutes and Ladders. Hungry, Hungry Hippys. Those games had rules, but we approached the games as a whole entity instead of thinking about how to maximize our chances of winning by analyzing each rule in isolation. That was how I approached D&D when I was learning to play it in the early 80s at the age of 7. Not as a subset of rules that could be optimized, but as a framework for fun.
In other words, the game has changed because we've been given too much info on how to optimize the game. If you want to return to the days of old when the game was less like a computer game and more like a storytelling session, I suggest either:
1.) Finding players that have no idea of how to use the internet (I think there are 6 left in the US), or
2.) Use a new rule system - but don't let your players buy or look at the rule books or touch their character sheets! Instead, just help them through character construction and hold all the paper yourself. Just tell them to roll a die when they need to and verbally explain what they need to know. If they can't hold the rules to min/max them, they'll approach the game from a more of a storytelling perspective.
Back in the days of 1E and early 2E, people had only the books and Dragon magazine (White Dwarf, Dungeon, etc ...) to use as aides in designing a game and running a character. The limits of their tactics were bound by their mind and the things in those books. If you wanted to figure out how to optimize an attack strategy, you had to do all the work yourself.
Now, we have the internet. Somebody comes up with an issue and starts discussing it on a message board. Then, someone else takes the work of the first person, analyses it and adds their own $0.02. Then another person adds their perspective and analysis. Soon, you have a 200 post long thread discussing the optimized use of power attack that has been read by thousands of players. Those players take that knowledge back to their games and spread it amongst all their friends. One of them returns to the internet to discuss the use of power attack in a particular scenario and the cycle begins again, but in a narrower area of the general rule.
This has resulted in an optimization of tactics in the game by players and DMs. In the old days, many players did not consider the benefits of interacting their abilities with the abilities of other PCs. Now, these discussions flood message boards on a daily basis.
As people have begun to discuss the optimization of the game, they tend to pull back from the game and see it as a collection of rules instead of as a game as a whole.
Think back to the earliest board games you ever played. Candyland. Chutes and Ladders. Hungry, Hungry Hippys. Those games had rules, but we approached the games as a whole entity instead of thinking about how to maximize our chances of winning by analyzing each rule in isolation. That was how I approached D&D when I was learning to play it in the early 80s at the age of 7. Not as a subset of rules that could be optimized, but as a framework for fun.
In other words, the game has changed because we've been given too much info on how to optimize the game. If you want to return to the days of old when the game was less like a computer game and more like a storytelling session, I suggest either:
1.) Finding players that have no idea of how to use the internet (I think there are 6 left in the US), or
2.) Use a new rule system - but don't let your players buy or look at the rule books or touch their character sheets! Instead, just help them through character construction and hold all the paper yourself. Just tell them to roll a die when they need to and verbally explain what they need to know. If they can't hold the rules to min/max them, they'll approach the game from a more of a storytelling perspective.
LostWorldsMike
First Post
Driddle said:
I don't think so. Someone (Uthrecht?) pointed out that CRPGs are much more limited in scope than tabletop RPGs and, while I can see that changing SOME day, I can't imagine it happening any time soon. Right now, the absolute BEST computer "GM" can't hold a candle to a decent human GM in terms of being able to adapt to player actions.
And I think CRPGs hold the most appeal for people who want something different than the typical tabletop game.
(Disclaimer: I am not attempting to cast aspersions on any style of play. The only RIGHT way to play ANY RPG is the way that's fun for you.)
Back to my point...
If all you want out of an RPG is combat, then you won't miss too much if you play the computer version. However, if you want in-depth interaction between your character and NPCs, well, you're not going to get that from your computer.
Anywho. I guess what I'm getting at is that both types of games (tabletop and computer) have their strengths, and both types of game draw in people who appreciate the particular strength of the game they're playing.
The bottom line, in my not so humble opinion, is that, irregardless of how the tabletop game you love changes it's published rules, you're always free to modify them so they suit the style of play you want for your home game.
Last edited:
Henry
Autoexreginated
Not for 2004, apparently. 
I haven't found a single worthwhile (to me) product on any release lists for 2004.
As a whole, however, it has definitely influenced tabletop RPG's - especially in the realms of rules consistency and emphasis on game balance (PC's vs. opposition). However, it hasn't "ruined" it by a long shot. Computer RPG's tend towards the specific, whereas Tabletop games are extensible, just by the imagination of the human brain. If Computer programs get near-human-level inspiration enough to run the equivalent of multiple awesome tabletop sessions, then we have MORE SERIOUS problems than them surpassing RPG's. (Cybernet anyone?)
Also is the element of human interaction, which in my opinion cannot be duplicated in a computer environment. In my opinion, someone who has actually gamed with a good group of players in person, and comparing that experience with gaming remotely, no matter how good the players, cannot seriously rate the online experience as better. The human interaction brings a different dimension that cannot br replaced (short of "Matrix-style" virtual reality.) In gaming remotely, you experience things with only two senses - sight and sound - whereas in person all your senses are working to provide you with a fuller experience. Good graphics count, good sounds count, good storylines count - but a good narrator in a live environment can make the experience far more enjoyable. Your mileage may vary, but I will never give up that belief - nay, statement of truth.
So, until we get a "Matrix-style" VR system, where players can plug in and experience not only sight and sound, but taste, touch, and scent, then in-person tabletop games will always have an element that Computer games cannot have.
I haven't found a single worthwhile (to me) product on any release lists for 2004.As a whole, however, it has definitely influenced tabletop RPG's - especially in the realms of rules consistency and emphasis on game balance (PC's vs. opposition). However, it hasn't "ruined" it by a long shot. Computer RPG's tend towards the specific, whereas Tabletop games are extensible, just by the imagination of the human brain. If Computer programs get near-human-level inspiration enough to run the equivalent of multiple awesome tabletop sessions, then we have MORE SERIOUS problems than them surpassing RPG's.
(Cybernet anyone?)Also is the element of human interaction, which in my opinion cannot be duplicated in a computer environment. In my opinion, someone who has actually gamed with a good group of players in person, and comparing that experience with gaming remotely, no matter how good the players, cannot seriously rate the online experience as better. The human interaction brings a different dimension that cannot br replaced (short of "Matrix-style" virtual reality.) In gaming remotely, you experience things with only two senses - sight and sound - whereas in person all your senses are working to provide you with a fuller experience. Good graphics count, good sounds count, good storylines count - but a good narrator in a live environment can make the experience far more enjoyable. Your mileage may vary, but I will never give up that belief - nay, statement of truth.
So, until we get a "Matrix-style" VR system, where players can plug in and experience not only sight and sound, but taste, touch, and scent, then in-person tabletop games will always have an element that Computer games cannot have.
WayneLigon
Adventurer
That made my day. Thank youjgsugden said:
Cerubus Dark
First Post
There is too a box on Pen and Paper RPGs. Its call Imagination, limit this and you limit your games.Utrecht said:
As far as painting the world goes, I need more paint, Its getting bland with just shades of gray. Time to shake the Pc's world abit. Time to put the fear of the gods back in them.
![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
Last edited:
WayneLigon
Adventurer
Someone, I cannot remember who, said that a system like that will be the last invention humanity ever makesHenry said:
Bring it on. I want my Dream Park 
Sejs
First Post
Nope, they have not.
CRPGs can be fun and whatnot, but they can't come anywhere near the depth of tabletop gaming. There's no human intelligence on the other end of a crpg to interpret and react to what you want to do. CRPGs are just the next step up from a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book. Fun, but ultimatly limited.
And as Hjorimir and others have said - it's not all bad, either. Some of the things learned from CRPGs can really add to the tabletop game.
CRPGs can be fun and whatnot, but they can't come anywhere near the depth of tabletop gaming. There's no human intelligence on the other end of a crpg to interpret and react to what you want to do. CRPGs are just the next step up from a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book. Fun, but ultimatly limited.
And as Hjorimir and others have said - it's not all bad, either. Some of the things learned from CRPGs can really add to the tabletop game.
Henry said:
Well, yeah. Of course they'll have the element of face-to-face human interaction. (Insert good-natured "Duh!" here + smiley face)
What I'm suggesting is that the human interaction has shifted toward an attitude more akin to how we approach computer games. The style of character manipulation has shifted. ... Yes, we'll still sit around the table and talk about our characters with each other, but now there are growing elements of the stuff I listed above -- number-crunching, class modulization, etc.
The Mirrorball Man
Aventurier
Actually, there is no way that we could ever be completely sure that we are not living in a simulation.WayneLigon said:Someone, I cannot remember who, said that a system like that will be the last invention humanity ever makes
Similar Threads
